Only enterprise and developers can bypass Windows Store for Metro apps

General distribution of Windows 8 Metro apps will be limited to the Windows …

Microsoft will restrict general distribution of Metro apps to the Windows Store, but grant exceptions to enterprises and developers, allowing them to side-load applications onto Windows 8 devices. While Windows 8 will be an operating system for both desktops and tablets, Microsoft is creating two sets of rules for traditional desktop apps and Metro-style apps, which are optimized for touch screens but will run on any Windows 8 device.

A primer for Windows developers on Microsoft’s website states that distribution of traditional desktop applications will proceed as usual. “Open distribution: retail stores, web, private networks, individual sharing, and so on” will be allowed, Microsoft says. Metro apps, on the other hand, will be “Distributed through the Windows Store. Apps must pass certification so that users download and try apps with confidence in their safety and privacy. Side-loading is available for enterprises and developers.”

This approach is similar to the one taken by Apple with its iPhone and iPad App Store, and also similar to Microsoft’s own Windows Phone 7 Marketplace, although jailbreaks and workarounds allowing side-loading have been released by independent developers for both iOS and WP7. With Google’s Android, by contrast, it is easy for any user to install non-market applications from either third-party app stores such as Amazon’s or by downloading software directly from an app maker’s website. The exceptions carved out by Microsoft will let developers test apps and businesses distribute custom or private apps to employees.

Windows Phone 7 uses a 70/30 revenue split in which Microsoft keeps 30 percent of app payments, and a similar split seems likely for Windows 8 Metro apps. According to the IStartedSomething.com blog, Microsoft’s primer for Windows developers briefly confirmed the 70/30 split for Metro apps but later deleted the information. In other news, we learned last week that while Windows 8 devices with ARM processors won’t run apps originally built for Intel-based computers, Microsoft is working on a Metro version of its popular Office software.

I can understand this. Microsoft has the enterprise, though so they need to make sure that Windows 8 serves that market. If they copy Apple's app store model too closely, they'll alienate the enterprise. Honestly, Apple makes a decent enough consumer grade tablet. Microsoft's best bet for success is to sell tablets to the enterprise. Apple can't compete with a Windows 8 tablet that is also a full on desktop when docked to a keyboard and mouse. If Windows 8 is what I think it will be, laptops in the enterprise are on thin ice as is the iPad. Both will be replaced by Windows 8 tablets and docking stations.

That is of course, assuming that Microsoft makes it easy for businesses to load their own custom software onto the tablets, like they are suggesting they will. If it's a pain in the ass to deploy custom business software to it, like it is to deploy to the iPad, then Windows 8 tablets won't live up to the promise. Even GPO management won't save the latest tablet from Redmond from following the other tablets in its history if you can't get enterprise software on the device easily.

I'd wager that's also part of the goal. What Microsoft wants to do is minimize privacy as eliminating it is a rather foolhardy goal. The people that are interested enough in running side-loaded (and most likely pirated apps) will do so, but for the large populace, they'll just buy the app/game/etc…

Heck, a lockdown has long been needed in order to ensure system security. If a Windows 8 ARM tablet was ever to succeed, Microsoft was going to need to avoid the "your tablet runs antivirus" ads from Apple and Google.

This announcement has absolutely 0 to do with Windows 8 on a Desktop. Notice how if mentions Metro apps. As in, those built for the touch interface, not the desktop interface.

This really isn't the least bit surprising, MS basically is going to live or die in the tablet space based on user experience with the Metro interface. They don't really have a choice but to start by grooming all apps to keep with their UI/UX conventions.

I've always argued that "openness" was one of the strengths of Windows. It may not be an open-source operating system, but it's always been easy for users to do pretty much whatever they wanted with their machine. I've always thought that was one of the strengths of the platform.

That Microsoft is apparently willing to cut out this core strength for their mobile OS is unfortunate. My guess is that the move is purely based on money: They want to get in on the whole curated app-store scene, and the share of every app sale that brings. I'm sure they feel left out by selling the operating system and letting people dare load their own software on it without giving Microsoft a cut.

We're increasingly moving towards a more tightly controlled computing experience, and I don't care for it at all. Cloud services that can't interact with one another are tying us to particular platforms. We're increasingly required to go through storefronts controlled by the OS-maker to get our software.

If this means no ugly apps with non-default interfaces like we see with applications now, all power to Microsoft! The market for Metro apps will be relatively small in the beginning so Microsoft can still change course if really necessary.

I think if they were smarter they'd allow sideloading of non-approved apps in one of the higher end SKUs - like "Windows 8 Ultimate for Desktop".

I get that you want to keep things simple and safe for casual users - but we geeks are probably going to want to load little hacks and small utilitities from developers who maybe don't want to go to the trouble of getting stuff into the MS App Store.

Hmm. I was thinking that there are a non-trivial number of applications that could benefit from some small Metro add-on. I suppose you could make it free but non-functional without the main app, but it sure seems like a pain to have to go to the app store to get it rather than have it added automatically when you install the main application.

HisMajestyTheKing wrote:

If this means no ugly apps with non-default interfaces ...

If you're talking to Adobe, I'm with you. Intellectually, I understand that title bars just waste space and color can be distracting, but I still miss 'em.

The comments here are a bit nonsense. If developers can sideload, that means anyone with a free download of Visual Studio Express can install them. Just like Windows phone/xbox.

'Curated' app stores have worked pretty well for iOS and WP7. I think the model is sound, because of the constant nonsense of administering home pcs. They are almost all centered around the wide-open nature of the OS.

1. Antivirus software, why? Because users can install anything they find.2. Install routines, why? Because there is no single way to install.3. Backup PC, why? Because so many programs can screw everything up.4. online apps, why? Because it's automatically kept up to date.

This is what MS is good at, btw. They're flexible enough to admit when someone else's idea is useful. This way of doing things is much better for consumers than the old way. It's not better for freedom, or tinkering or education, but there has to be a balance. At some point, we didn't allow just anyone to be a doctor, because it wasn't safe. This is because the market for software, like doctors, isn't perfect and people need to be saved from themselves. There will always be Linux and regular Windows and Android and the Internet. So far, at least, they show no signs of fading in the West.

Hmm. I was thinking that there are a non-trivial number of applications that could benefit from some small Metro add-on. I suppose you could make it free but non-functional without the main app, but it sure seems like a pain to have to go to the app store to get it rather than have it added automatically when you install the main application.

That's actually a good point. Hopefully there will be a way to link Marketplace packages from standalone installers for those using hybrid form factors (or maybe the other way around, the Marketplace will grab the full app as part of the install).

I know they have no issue with apps like that, there are numerous CRM apps for WP7 that are useless without a back-end system to link to, so at least the option is there.

I've said it in previous ars articles about Windows 8, but I'm really excited about where Microsoft is headed here. Is every single idea they're showing perfect? Absolutely not, but as someone who abandoned the platform somewhere around Windows 98, the overall push to clearly rewritethe roadmap and head in new operational and user interface directions is really interesting. These changes may absolutely get me to buy a Windows 8-based device.

If anything, I'd tell Microsoft to not be afraid to break even more; slaughter a few sacred cows in search of new ideas for computing. The moment we cling so vigorously to what we already know is when I think it's time to hand in our nerd cards.

Traditionally it has taken Microsoft three releases to produce a reasonably mature product. By industry standards their performance has been pretty good since they have typically succeeded in getting through that process and actually producing software that customer's found value in. Others have had a long history of throwing much of their work into the bit bucket. It will take a while to see what if anything Metro amounts to. But there seems to be a fair amount of indecision at Microsoft about the system chart they have been flashing on the screen. Clearly, nobody expects the desktop apps to go away. But, it is very unclear if Microsoft thinks Metro is the strategic direction for their future or just for one segment of their business. Not surprisingly those presenting the big picture have a grand vision. But most of its substance seems to be the work of ten summer interns. Those left with the job of turning that work into the vision seem to have widely varying ideas of what the vision is. One presentation I listened to did not seem to buy into the WinRT vision at all. The other one seemed to be focused on a UI that would never be used with a real keyboard. The App store picture may work in this kind of environment. But I have my doubts that the business world wants to run all of its software business through the App store. Of course, Microsoft will have many years to revisit their decisions as they flounder trying to actually create some kind of product that people actually will use.

If anything, I'd tell Microsoft to not be afraid to break even more; slaughter a few sacred cows in search of new ideas for computing. The moment we cling so vigorously to what we already know is when I think it's time to hand in our nerd cards.

Unfortunately, doing something like that will definitely NOT fly in a very important market segment: business users. If MS decides to cut back that much on usability and backward compatibility, then they will never sell the plateform to these users. The result is very likely to be very unpleasant for pretty much everyone involved. Given that this move would just be to carter for the "I want new shiny!" market segment (which is already mostly in bed with apple gadget - yes, me too), that would be a neat way for MS to suicide the platform.

Ouch, I'm aware this doesn't necessarily shoves out third-party platforms like Steam, of which most games will never use a Metro-style UI/programming model anyway, but it's precisely the extent which is worrying.

What if I decide to develop a game with all the latest WinRT technologies with C# and "Silverlight", do I get blocked out from selling via Steam, my own licensing model, or even offering free Betas to customers.

What about Free and Open Source Metro-style apps. They're all gonna have to be distributed through the Windows Store?

I can't see how this fits with any kind of logical argument about Windows 8; at this point you'd be better off simply writing your life away to Apple. The openness of Windows' App model was a strong point for me, but they just brought in buzzkillington.

who never have to click that sideload button. Banning sideloading does nothing to improve user experience. It's all about control.

No, it is about safety, because if they user can do it on their tablet, some asshat malware provider is going to ask them to do it. Yep, grandma will get an email will detailed instructions on how to sideload a keylogger, and she'll actually manage to install the damned thing.

What if I decide to develop a game with all the latest WinRT technologies with C# and "Silverlight", do I get blocked out from selling via Steam, my own licensing model, or even offering free Betas to customers.

The MS app store already has support for demos.

That being said, I would gather that the answer to your question would be yes (and, apparently, XNA won't be supported either). However, if you app was written in C++ and DirectX, it shouldn't be too hard to wrap it into two different container: on traditional app for steam an one for the marketplace (although it probably won't run on ARM).

This, however, might change: it's possible that MS will release a new version of XNA that supports Metro (and, hopefully, DX11) as a target platform and tghat will make it even simpler to provide a game for Win8, Steam, XBox 360 AND Winphone 7.

No, it is about safety, because if they user can do it on their tablet, some asshat malware provider is going to ask them to do it. Yep, grandma will get an email will detailed instructions on how to sideload a keylogger, and she'll actually manage to install the damned thing.

Social engineering can only go so far. And a proper sandbox and permissions model should shut down that kind of malware.

I hesitate to question Microsoft's leveraging of their monopoly to push lock down and forcing software vendors through their store for Metro, I fear I will be flamed up and down for doing so.

I would point out that Microsoft has nothing of the sort in the tablet/mobile space, which is where this announcement actually matters.

Quote:

Oh and Happysin, Metro applies to all Windows platforms going forward. It is the new way of things.

Except on the Desktop itself. I agree that Metro is going for touch-oriented interfaces (and the 360?), but MS isn't anywhere near adopting Metro interface for the desktop. Again, Desktop apps are not Metro apps. Touch apps are.

I hesitate to question Microsoft's leveraging of their monopoly to push lock down and forcing software vendors through their store for Metro, I fear I will be flamed up and down for doing so.

Again, my personal hope is that Metro will be a "second view" of the OS. It'll be the principal UI for tablet and highly portable devices but only the secondary mode for Desktops. That's pretty much the only way Windows 8 will gain any traction.

I'm all for heavily controlled app stores, so long as you can also get stuff from outside the app store.

My ideal platform would have an app store with only quality stuff (e.g. no knockoffs or "smoke this drug" apps a la android market), but you could still get stuff that conflicted with the platform holder's interests by going outside the app store. (say, a third-party app store or a tethering app)

Again, my personal hope is that Metro will be a "second view" of the OS. It'll be the principal UI for tablet and highly portable devices but only the secondary mode for Desktops. That's pretty much the only way Windows 8 will gain any traction.

From the looks of things, they'll use Windows 8 and 9 to get traction with the Metro APIs then start retiring the older APIs. Probably at a very rapid rate, which is why they already have exemptions in for "enterprise" and "developers." MS is probably looking at this as "do or die" so they're going for the big grab and moving from "open" to "lock down" as quickly as possible.

jrr_1 wrote:

I'm all for heavily controlled app stores, so long as you can also get stuff from outside the app store.

Which you can do on OS X, and on W8 if the developer avoids the Metro APIs. I'm guessing the long term goal for both companies is to go the way of iOS for all platforms.

So does this mean if I switch from desktop interface to Metro interface, all my open apps for the desktop interface will be suspended, similar to switching user? So basically Win8 will be a Win7 with a Metro VM?

Again, my personal hope is that Metro will be a "second view" of the OS. It'll be the principal UI for tablet and highly portable devices but only the secondary mode for Desktops. That's pretty much the only way Windows 8 will gain any traction.

From the looks of things, they'll use Windows 8 and 9 to get traction with the Metro APIs then start retiring the older APIs. Probably at a very rapid rate, which is why they already have exemptions in for "enterprise" and "developers." MS is probably looking at this as "do or die" so they're going for the big grab and moving from "open" to "lock down" as quickly as possible.

We'll see. Windows 9 is still a long way forward: at least 4 years if all goes according to the plan and maybe, by that time, the problem won't be so hard to solve.

This is going to be good news for the vast majority of Windows users. Microsoft is obviously concerned about the quality of the user experience for Metro.

Developers also will benefit from having a highly visible curated marketplace, just as they have done on mobile platforms. Enterprise users and those building traditional desktop applications are not affected.

I don't understand what is"evil" is here? Is it because Microsoft wants to take a percentage of sales? Or is it just because it's Microsoft, and not a company based in Silicon Valley?

Total crap. Once again, a company is going to sell a device with strings attached. Hamilton Beach does not require me to buy toast from them. Pioneer does not force me to buy my CD's from them. Furthermore, neither of them restrict how I can sell my home-made toast or music, nor do they require a 30% tax!

Apple and the nanny police started a horrible precedent with all this censorhip, restriction and usary tax rate. Google followed suit, and now the last great Tech company is climbing on-board. And the stupid consumers seem to love it. I hate it and you should too.

I'd wager that's also part of the goal. What Microsoft wants to do is minimize piracy as eliminating it is a rather foolhardy goal. The people that are interested enough in running side-loaded (and most likely pirated apps) will do so, but for the large populace, they'll just buy the app/game/etc…

I doubt that is the underlying reason for why Microsoft is going with such a system, in all likelyhood the reasons are like this:#1 - As Apple has clearly shown, the market place model is a firm and clear revenue stream.#2 - MS can review all the applications to ensure there are no rootkits, malware, etc (because regular consumers do not know any better).

The exceptions provided for enterprise and developers enables them (like mine) to load our custom application on to work machines.

However I fully expect a exception/deal made with platforms like steam/impulse/origin/etc to provide applications through their services so long as they comply with a yet to be announced set of requirements.

This is in many ways a good thing as the retail model of software distribution has been withering for quite a long time. Walk into any best buy and compare the way it is now to how it used to be, the software on shelves now is virtually all console video games with a small smattering of business applications.